Your point framed the issue as one of political systems("Consumerist capitalism"), not moving the goalpost at all to say that communism also or perhaps even moreso is responsible for creating pollution.
If I framed the issue by saying that it's all because stupid people can't live in harmony with nature and someone replies with one of the countless examples of other animals ruining their habitats that is not moving the goalpost at all, that is showing that my framing is incorrect.
I and others took it as political because you put capitalism in front of consumerism.
Even if I were to take out the capitalism from your initial statement:
"Consumerism revolves around making profit from fixing the problems that consumerism has created in the first place from making profit."
This falls down when you begin to look at what consumerism is, which is buying and using goods to signal status. This practice has existed since the dawn of time when Ogg traded a new ax to Ugg for the shiny rock to impress Ogget.
The industrial revolution, which it looks like is the actual target of your ire just accelerated the ability for more people to obtain the shiny rocks, leading to the loss of value in shiny rocks and thus the demand for more and new types of shiny rocks.
In a sibling comment, you do make it political by comparing Communist countries to Rich countries:
"Communist countries like the one I was born in are too poor to generate the amount of excessive consumerism and environment damage rich countries do."
This is also not a good argument unless your view is that by making people richer and allowing them to have access to more things is a bad idea.
Bringing people up from a subsistence level of survival to a modern lifestyle costs energy and resources. Now, we could say that it is bad to bring people up or that we don't want to. That is a moral argument that you can make, I think that you will be hard pressed to find anyone that agrees that human society peaked at any point in the past in terms of lifestyle, comfort or almost any other metric.
Now, could we be more mindful of how we elevate and progress? I do believe that we could.
Comments
Your point framed the issue as one of political systems("Consumerist capitalism"), not moving the goalpost at all to say that communism also or perhaps even moreso is responsible for creating pollution.
If I framed the issue by saying that it's all because stupid people can't live in harmony with nature and someone replies with one of the countless examples of other animals ruining their habitats that is not moving the goalpost at all, that is showing that my framing is incorrect.
No I didn't frame it as purely political but in the frame of consumerism.
I and others took it as political because you put capitalism in front of consumerism.
Even if I were to take out the capitalism from your initial statement: "Consumerism revolves around making profit from fixing the problems that consumerism has created in the first place from making profit."
This falls down when you begin to look at what consumerism is, which is buying and using goods to signal status. This practice has existed since the dawn of time when Ogg traded a new ax to Ugg for the shiny rock to impress Ogget.
The industrial revolution, which it looks like is the actual target of your ire just accelerated the ability for more people to obtain the shiny rocks, leading to the loss of value in shiny rocks and thus the demand for more and new types of shiny rocks.
In a sibling comment, you do make it political by comparing Communist countries to Rich countries: "Communist countries like the one I was born in are too poor to generate the amount of excessive consumerism and environment damage rich countries do."
This is also not a good argument unless your view is that by making people richer and allowing them to have access to more things is a bad idea.
Bringing people up from a subsistence level of survival to a modern lifestyle costs energy and resources. Now, we could say that it is bad to bring people up or that we don't want to. That is a moral argument that you can make, I think that you will be hard pressed to find anyone that agrees that human society peaked at any point in the past in terms of lifestyle, comfort or almost any other metric.
Now, could we be more mindful of how we elevate and progress? I do believe that we could.